From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 3 16:49:01 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2A5D106566C; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 16:49:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vw0-f54.google.com (mail-vw0-f54.google.com [209.85.212.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CA2A8FC19; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 16:49:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vws11 with SMTP id 11so2018345vws.13 for ; Thu, 03 Nov 2011 09:49:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Sxf4EevLZFOrlY8EKM6neIobBnkdqQh2xRUGyw0lyJQ=; b=he/ORG+yn8DA88B7KBV8rEYOgoVZHXeh+Ecgp6hF9FUeOIl+wN4eKttZAEnMg0RLC7 AQorLuoWiU8o/s8K3pmNvu+NP3jLTiSeI2Vah5pDDDIvH1HFo7viZqKdxWq7dbTsuNGx OjeoyDO1Nyr+bZz8RK8JBGeuLpb5K4Dq8M40U= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.24.102 with SMTP id t6mr10353618vdf.106.1320338940524; Thu, 03 Nov 2011 09:49:00 -0700 (PDT) Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.29.198 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 09:49:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4EAF18B2.9040909@FreeBSD.org> <4EAF6442.5020901@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 09:49:00 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: kQueMHSs4yc5gszqaFQP-ME8_XA Message-ID: From: Adrian Chadd To: Arnaud Lacombe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Doug Barton , freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org, freebsd-current Subject: Re: request: merging if_ath_tx branch to HEAD X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 16:49:01 -0000 On 3 November 2011 09:45, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: > Maybe not the place to ask, but why are you (ie. FreeBSD folks) unable > to unleash commit to `trunk' and let only required MFC go to > `stable/9' ? Hi, We "can". It's just that we're being "nice" to keep the diffs between -HEAD and stable/9 low to keep things easier for release engineering. But it's taking a while and I really want to push this 11n stuff into -HEAD so I can continue active development in a way that users can actively test it. :) Adrian